Can we talk about the absurdity of religion . . .

Religion is very, very hypocritical. Lets just leave it at that shall we?

Why do you say its absurd?

I agree - religion is absurd.

Why?

Well, speaking personally, I think that believing in deities whose existence can in no way be proven is absurd to start with. Okay, I get the idea that the whole point of faith is you have to believe, but I prefer to put my faith in things that I know are there.

Plus I have a hard time taking any religious text seriously that says the world was created in 6 days and is about 6,000 years old, when all scientific evidence points to a rather longer time periods.

I prefer to think of the Bible (the New Testament anyway) as just a series of historical documents, written about events of the time, which may have been mis-translated, embellished or outright fabricated. I also reckon Jesus probably did exist, but was a political activist, rather than the son of God. I think his miracles were fabrications or at best greatly exaggerated and if he was crucified, he didn't ascend to Heaven after he was put in the tomb...probably a bunch of grave robbers decided to hide it as a prank or something.

As for the Old Testament - who knows? Maybe the writers were high on drugs or just plain crazy.

There are plenty of other reasons, including some of the more bizarre traditions that have carried over to modern times, particularly in the Catholic Church, such as no meat on Fridays, no work on Sundays and no contraception.



In a nutshell, I just find the idea of some apparently all-powerful deity, capable of creating entire planets, just sitting back and watching (especially after speaking to prophets, causing extinction-level floods and various other things) with apparent total apathy while mankind continues to largely act like complete idiots, a bit much to swallow.

I also believe that if there were any such deity in existence, he (or she) wouldn't care whether we all congregated in temples every Sunday to sing songs at them and offer prayers.

While Christianity and Judaism have made some major strides with respect to modernisation, they still have work to do. And as for Islam...there are far too many aspects that can either be BADLY misinterpreted or are simply out of touch with the modern world.

I don't know enough about Buddhism to make much comment, but again, the idea of praying to some nonexistent (in all detectable / measurable senses) deity seems a bit odd.

I think the Japanese religion of Shinto (in which all plants, animals and elements are supposed to have spirits) makes some sense in that they at least pray to things you can see and feel.

You know, religion is like having a d!ck. It's fine to have one. It's fine to be proud of it. But you don't really want to whip it out and start waving it around too much or try ramming it down other people's throats....

I'd just like to point out dyrewolfe that nowhere in the Bible does it say that the Earth is 6000 years old, that was a scholar's own calculations using the ages said in the Bible to make a rough estimate.

Also, when translated, the original Hebrew word which has been translated as "day" does not neccesarily translate perfectly to our definition of day, in fact it probably would make more sense if it was translated as; "stage". From that, the creation story is pretty much spot on to how evolution worked, obviously they did not understand evolution so many years ago, but the order of light, earth and sea, fish, animals and then finally man is spot on.

Funadmental Christianity, i.e. taking everything the Bible says literally, is ridiculous clearly, and they are, in general, the minority. However, it is less absurd if you take, the Old Testament in particuarly, the stories as metaphorical rather than literal.

invincibleILeak (CL-6WF) wrote:I'd just like to point out dyrewolfe that nowhere in the Bible does it say that the Earth is 6000 years old, that was a scholar's own calculations using the ages said in the Bible to make a rough estimate.

Also, when translated, the original Hebrew word which has been translated as "day" does not neccesarily translate perfectly to our definition of day, in fact it probably would make more sense if it was translated as; "stage". From that, the creation story is pretty much spot on to how evolution worked, obviously they did not understand evolution so many years ago, but the order of light, earth and sea, fish, animals and then finally man is spot on.

Funadmental Christianity, i.e. taking everything the Bible says literally, is ridiculous clearly, and they are, in general, the minority. However, it is less absurd if you take, the Old Testament in particuarly, the stories as metaphorical rather than literal.

How can you take the word of The Bible not to be literal? It's what generations of uninformed folk before you did and it formed the basis of Christianity. It is also what was intended when it was 'written' by uninformed folk. Anyone who says it's not to be taken literally says it as a kop-out so that they can foolishly try and suggest they've squared the circle of religion/Christianity.

The only option you have is to take The Bible in its literal meaning. If you don't, you're showing that it's a load of bobbins that you can pick and choose from, which was never the intention of it when it was created.

I do really hope you come back on this. I'll rip you to shreds.

Does The Bible speak of circles?

Mercurio wrote:
How can you take the word of The Bible not to be literal?

It's not a text book. It's a book about faith, spirituality and an aid to theology. Like all holy books. Feel free to comment on any of the following being as this thread was supposed to be about religion - I assume you meant all religious faiths, not just Christianity? These are all equivalent (to the bible) holy books for other religions:

Tanakh (Old Testament).
Talmud.
Midrash.
New Testament.
Qur'an.
Sunnah (from hadith).
Nahjul Balagha.
Avesta.
Vedas.
Upanishads.
Bhagavad Gita (in the Mahabharata).
Various Puranas (Vishnu Purana, Shiva Purana, Skanda Purana, Linga Purana, Garuda Purana, Matsya Purana, etc).
Tantras (including Kularnava Tantra).
Sutras, and their commentaries.
Vachanas Lingayats.
Adi Granth.
Purvas (12 angas including Acarangasutra and Sutrakritanga, 34 angabahya including Uttaradhyayana Sutra and Kalpa Sutra. Also: Upasakdasanga Sutra, Dashavaikalika Sutra, and Nandi Sutra.
Purvas (small number; reject most Shvetambara Purvas).
Large number of scholastic expositions (anuyoga): Samayasara, Niyamasara, Pravacanasara, and Pancastikaya; Anupreksa; Samadhishataka of Pujyapada; Tattvarthasutra of Umasvati.
Tattvarthasutra Jainism (minor differences between Digambara and Shvetambara versions).
Other separate books of Jain Canon: Sanmatitarka, Gomattasara, Jayadhavala, Adipurana, Dvatrimshika, Aptamimamsa, Mulacara, Ratnakarandasravakacara, Sagaradharmamrita.
Pali Tripitaka.
Jataka stories (semi-cannonical).
Visuddimagga or Path of Purification (semi-cannonical).
Questions of King Milinda (semi-cannonical).
Chinese Tripitaka.
Tibetan Tripitaka.
Lotus Sutra (Saddharma-Pundarika).
Sukhavativyuha Sutras.
Meditation on Buddha Amitayus.
Garland Sutra (Avatamsaka Sutra).
Perfection of Wisdom in Eight Thousand Lines (Astasahasrika Prajnaparamita Sutra).
Sutra of Hui Neng (Platform Sutra).
Lankavatara Sutra.
Mahaparinirvana Sutra; Surangama Sutra Buddha; Golden Light Sutra (Suvarnaprabhasottama).
Writings of Nagarjuna, Shantideva, Aryadeva, Vasubandhu, Dharmakirti, Gyalwa Longchenpa, Sakya Pandita, Milarepa, and Lama Tsongkhapa.
Mulamadhyamaka Karika and Precious Garland.
Guide to the Bodhisattva's Way of Life (Bodhisattvacharyavatara).
Hevajra Tantra; Kalacakra Tantra; Guhyasamaja Tantra.
Tibetan Book of the Dead (Bardo Thodol).
Five Classics: Book of Songs; Book of History; Spring and Autumn Annals; Book of Ritual; I Ching (Book of Changes).
Four Books: Analects; the Great Learning; the Doctrine of the Mean; the Mencius.
Tao Te Ching.
Chuang-tzu.
Treatise on Response and Retribution (T'ai-Shang Kan-Ying P'ien).
Tract of the Quiet Way (Yin Chih Wen).
Kojiki.
Nihon.
K-oki.
Ofudesaki.
Mikagura-uta.
Michi-no-Shiori.
Johrei.
Goseigen.
Nectarean Shower of Holy Doctrines.
Song of the Angel.
Holy Sutra for Spiritual Healing.
Divine Teachings of Kyososama.
Chun Boo Kyung.
Gleanings from the Writings of Baha'u'llah.
Book of Certitude (Kitab-i-Iqan).
Hidden Words of Baha'u'llah.
Epistle to the Son of the Wolf.
Book of Mormon.
Doctrine and Covenants.
Pearl of Great Price.
Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures.
Dianetics.

There is nothing at all to suggest that the Bible has to be taken literally, and to suggest that it was written for that purpose is arrogant of yourself. The Old Testament in particular has been taken metaphorically for thousands of years, the New Testament is probably slightly less metaphorical but the miracles etc. all can be taken metaphorically.

I look forward to you "ripping me to threads."

Shouldnt you two be turning the other cheek?

I am sure it says that somewhere in the bible - somewhere in the bloated middle part.

I follow the flying spaghetti monster, lot less mither with that one, he's a much less spiteful god.

Hero wrote:I follow the flying spaghetti monster, lot less mither with that one, he's a much less spiteful god.

Except when he lumps bolognese sauce all down the front of your favourite shirt. That's pretty spiteful

Do not worship any other pasta based icon is the only commandment I believe.

Adam D (Hobo) wrote:Do not worship any other pasta based icon is the only commandment I believe.

Yeah he did put out a Fatwa on Lloyd Grossman and Anthony Worrall Thompson a few years back for their pasta & sauce based food ranges.
That can only be a good thing though.

Hero wrote:I follow the flying spaghetti monster, lot less mither with that one, he's a much less spiteful god.

What is the Holy Book of Pastafarianism? Is it true that Delia Smith is the devil too?

invincibleILeak (CL-6WF) wrote:There is nothing at all to suggest that the Bible has to be taken literally, and to suggest that it was written for that purpose is arrogant of yourself. The Old Testament in particular has been taken metaphorically for thousands of years, the New Testament is probably slightly less metaphorical but the miracles etc. all can be taken metaphorically.

I look forward to you "ripping me to threads."

Rubbish.

The Bible was wholly taken as literal until a couple of hundred years ago when scientific discoveries started to provide explanations. Knowing how silly it would look to continue to believe such things were literal, Christianity then stated they are only to be taken as metaphorical. How convenient

The Catholic Church still believes in God's miracles as evidenced by its continued canonisations.

I'm not being arrogant to know that The Bible is supposed to be literal but based on your warped logic, Euan Murray is.

I'm not arrogant to believe all the supernatural events that take place in The Bible are bullpoop, either. Prove me wrong, if you can.

You believe in something for which there is no evidence and you call me arrogant

Y I Man wrote:Debate the topic, not each other please. No need to get personal about it.

What's prompted this post?

Mercurio wrote:

Y I Man wrote:Debate the topic, not each other please. No need to get personal about it.

What's prompted this post?

"based on your warped logic"
"You believe in something for which there is no evidence and you call me arrogant"

I don't see a debate on the topic of religion but it seems to me the OP just wants to discuss the Christian Bible...perhaps they should change the opening post? Just a suggestion....

Any Debate on religion is bound to cause aguments and trouble. Im not a religios person myself, but I understand why and how people do follow religions.

However I am man enough to say, maybe we're right and maybe we're wrong. If we live a good life and love the people we should, treat others with respect and follow our conceince as well as the law. Then we will all have an intresting, happy, and fullfilling life.....

There is no point arguing about it because you will not change anybodys mind when it comes to the deep held beleifs in any or no religion. It's something that has caused all kinds of death but also all kinds of good in this world and that is also something that will never change....

Y I Man wrote:

Mercurio wrote:

Y I Man wrote:Debate the topic, not each other please. No need to get personal about it.

What's prompted this post?

"based on your warped logic"
"You believe in something for which there is no evidence and you call me arrogant"

Firstly, how come you pick me up for just saying the word 'arrogant' when the other person suggested I was arrogant before I added that. How have you missed that?

'Based on warped logic' was referring to him calling me arrogant.

It seems you have a bad case of double standards - do you believe in God?

Cari wrote:I don't see a debate on the topic of religion but it seems to me the OP just wants to discuss the Christian Bible...perhaps they should change the opening post? Just a suggestion....

Is the Bible not part of religion, then?

If someone wants to discuss other religions, fire away.

As all religion is based on nonsense, when you debate one you debate them all, so there's no need for me to differentiate.

Cari wrote:You know, religion is like having a d!ck. It's fine to have one. It's fine to be proud of it. But you don't really want to whip it out and start waving it around too much or try ramming it down other people's throats....

Y'know, this explains the kneeling

Don't know if this should be part of the 'grinds my gears' thread or not but here goes:

I don't see why I have to respect religion. I respect a persons right to have a belief, but I don't respect the belief itself. Any spiritual belief, for that matter.

I also don't see why religion gets special dispensation. How many of us would take someone seriously if they started going on about crystal healing and auras? Not too many, I guess.

If I was to be extremely disparaging about crystal healing I might ruffle a few feathers, but if I was to be equally disparaging about religion then I could be arrested in Ireland for breaking the blasphemy laws. What? How is religion deserving of such special protection when it has as much proof going for it as Uri Gellers spoon bending? And what happened to the separation of church and state?

I don't tiptoe around spiritual subjects and I don't see why religion should be treated any differently. If that offends someone then tough, it offends me even more that churches are tax exempt for no particular reason. It offends me that in order to be seen to be a good person I have to agree to be superstitious. It offends me that people are giving up a part of their lives for a fairy tale they were forced to swallow when they were children. It offends me the cult of personality, the brainwashing, the misogyny, the hypocrisy you are allowed to get away with as long as you can wrap it up in 'religion'. Intelligent Design and the attack on rational thinking really offends me.

But the songs are nice.

This thread reminds me of the following piece I saw on Facebook the other day... (obviously written for an American audience, but you get the idea)

---

In her radio show, Dr Laura Schlesinger said that, as an observant Orthodox Jew, homosexuality is an abomination according to Leviticus 18:22, and cannot be condoned under any circumstance.

The following response is an open letter to Dr. Laura, which was posted on the Internet. It's funny, as well as informative:

Dear Dr. Laura: Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination .... End of debate.

I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other elements of God's Laws and how to follow them.

1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of Menstrual uncleanliness -Lev15: 19-24. The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord -Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it?

6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination, Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there 'degrees' of abomination?

7. Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle-room here?

8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die?

9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev.19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? Lev.24:10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, so I'm confident you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.

Your adoring fan, James M Kauffman, Ed.D. Professor Emeritus, Dept. Of Curriculum, Instruction, and Special Education University of Virginia

(It would be a damn shame if we couldn't own a Canadian)

, Davie

My nephew had RE homework last week, he had to ask 5 different people what they think God looks like. He asked me, and when I said I see him as a bit like Yoda, but only not with green skin obviously, and with long grey hair and a beard down to his feet, my sister went mad.

She said he can't put that down, you're being silly, I said that's honestly how I see him, and anyway this whole religion thing is a bit far fetched anyway so why not make him look like a sci-fi hero? which didn't help.

JPX wrote:My nephew had RE homework last week, he had to ask 5 different people what they think God looks like. He asked me, and when I said I see him as a bit like Yoda, but only not with green skin obviously, and with long grey hair and a beard down to his feet, my sister went mad.

She said he can't put that down, you're being silly, I said that's honestly how I see him, and anyway this whole religion thing is a bit far fetched anyway so why not make him look like a sci-fi hero? which didn't help.

Of course your sister went mad, that's not Yoda, that's Gandalf.

greybeard wrote:

JPX wrote:My nephew had RE homework last week, he had to ask 5 different people what they think God looks like. He asked me, and when I said I see him as a bit like Yoda, but only not with green skin obviously, and with long grey hair and a beard down to his feet, my sister went mad.

She said he can't put that down, you're being silly, I said that's honestly how I see him, and anyway this whole religion thing is a bit far fetched anyway so why not make him look like a sci-fi hero? which didn't help.

Of course your sister went mad, that's not Yoda, that's Gandalf.

Or Dumbledore?

I was going to say that, but edited it out.

Pandering to the youf with derivative works just ain't cool.

I have a deeply religious work colleague who, when a female work colleague come in with her new born baby and upon finding out that she was living with her boyfriend, stated that "Having a baby out of wedlock is on the same unmoral lines as peadophilia".

When religious nuts come out with things like that, is it any wonder that modern society does not take what they say seriously?

xTwisTx wrote:I have a deeply religious work colleague who, when a female work colleague come in with her new born baby and upon finding out that she was living with her boyfriend, stated that "Having a baby out of wedlock is on the same unmoral lines as peadophilia".

When religious nuts come out with things like that, is it any wonder that modern society does not take what they say seriously?

Bet that got a good reaction!

She left rather quickly in tears. Fact is we are used to him sprouting this kind of crapola that we shrugged it off. Kinda like when your grandad pees himself.

For instance whenever it thunders he says it is the Lord showing his anger at our unclean lifestyles. I really must tell Michael Fish that so he can put it on his weather reports.

To me, religion is a very personal thing, and each to their own. Trouble is, a lot of people abuse their faith and create a lot of bad publicity about religion generally. Yet, there are many people who use their faith in a very positive way and have done some fantastic things with it.

xTwisTx wrote: For instance whenever it thunders he says it is the Lord showing his anger at our unclean lifestyles. I really must tell Michael Fish that so he can put it on his weather reports.

Sounds like Brad Pitt and Morgan Freeman need to be told about this loon!

Maybe....

I don't know what is worst. The things he says or that he truely believes it.

Seriously, if God told him in the night to kill his family - he probably would.